• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Strongest jobs recovery in decades.

On the current recovery... sure... it is way better than it was under Bush or would have been under Palin.. I mean the senile McCain.

As for partisan mouth foaming.. look at the other conservative posts.. that is your partisan mouth foaming.. mine is factual.



Paling was never elected, McCain is not the prez. your mouth foaming is approaching epic perportions. It is asinine that you think others are the partisan hacks. :lol:
 
the putz on pennsylvania came out for 45 seconds this morning to assure us all we're heading in the right direction

gosh, what must be his goal?
 
wasn't the economic condition of the eu subject of some major headlines just a couple months ago?
 
are you basing that on a learned understanding of economic reality or based on a blind devotion to leftwing babble?

Of course it is an understanding of economic reality.

Tell me, when has the conservative thinking of economic lazzie-faire ever worked? By worked I mean, created economic growth, jobs and a surplus... in the last 30 years.. NEVER. Hence the economic thinking is flawed on so many levels.
 
He is doing better under Obama-he doesn't live in the USA and America's decline is the eurosocialists' gain

Hardly. As much as the Americans like to think that they're the only gem of purity and goodness in the world, and that every other country on the face of the earth ought to either grovel or stay out of America's way, the reality is that, in the year 2010, your nation, along with the rest of the world, has come a long way from 1991. America is once again just one power among many, and any rational man can tell you that, for all of the stories of interdependence between America and China, it's the EU and America that are the closest partners when it comes down to world relations. It'd be disastrous to America to see the EU breakup, and it'd be disastrous to the EU to see America breakup.

Now, admittedly, I am English, and you're right in saying that the current trend is probably more favourable to our half of the partnership, whereas America's going through some rough times right now. But it'd be daft to alienate your most vital allies and partners because you're sore about losing your preeminent status.
 
9.6% unemployment means we're doing better than we were when unemployment was at 4%?

Take a break. Carrying all that water must be exhausting.

Ahh putting words in my mouth... so that is how you react, by attacking me instead of defending you standpoint..
 
Ironic, since it was the lack of government that got you into the ****hole you are in now.. ahh the irony of American conservative economic thinking!

American conservative thinking = lets **** up the economy with lazzie-faire policies so our friends can get rich, and then to fix the problem... do more of the same!

I don't argue for strict laissez-faire, but I think the so-called conservatives have given the doctrine a bad name. Under a real laissez-faire policy, their friends would take the same risks as everyone else. What we have instead is a kind of welfare for the rich.

The Republicans learned a lesson from the Contract With America and the subsequent shutdown of government. That is, Americans love the rhetoric of fiscal responsibility but hate the practice. Therefore, the best way to stay in power is to keep spending while reducing taxes, and never mind the consequences. Right-wing voters will always buy into crony capitalism, regardless of how detrimental it may be to their real interests, as long as the rhetoric sounds good.
 
I try and stay out of economic threads but it is a mystery to me how this is a success in any way

Quite simply, it is a success because Obama's Czar's choose this as the truthspeak for this Month.
 
Quite simply, it is a success because Obama's Czar's choose this as the truthspeak for this Month.

I've already posted my bit on the actual thread topic, and, if no one responds to it, I'll post it again, as it was the last post on the page, and is liable to be missed.

But right now, I'm more interested in the etymology of the word "Czar" as some sort of business magnate -- any idea where it originated or what exactly it's supposed to mean? It's not in common parlance over here.
 
This unemployment situation is intolerable. I blame the President first as last.

People who have jobs have to spend their paycheck helping to take care of their relatives who don't have any income. A lot more should be done to get some jobs going.
 
Ironic, since it was the lack of government that got you into the ****hole you are in now.. ahh the irony of American conservative economic thinking!

American conservative thinking = lets **** up the economy with lazzie-faire policies so our friends can get rich, and then to fix the problem... do more of the same!

There was plenty of government that got us into this. Ever heard of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac? Ever heard of lending rate games?
 
As much as the Americans like to think that they're the only gem of purity and goodness in the world, and that every other country on the face of the earth ought to either grovel or stay out of America's way,
I can't speak for every American, but I believe I speak for the vast majority when I say that your characterization of "what Americans like to think" is ridiculous.
 
But right now, I'm more interested in the etymology of the word "Czar" as some sort of business magnate -- any idea where it originated or what exactly it's supposed to mean? It's not in common parlance over here.
It's not a real title, more a nickname given to someone with the responsibility to manage or supervise an administration policy. I suppose it's supposed to connote some degree of independence and power, and it just plain sounds better to say "climate czar" than "special assistant to the President for matters concerning energy and climate change."
 
Jobs recovery is stronger than past recessions - Sep. 2, 2010

Also from the article:



Now I would like to ask the folks out there in the audience this question:

If a second stimulus is needed to avoid a secondary and possibly more severe recession, would you be in favour of it?

Although the question is irrelevent as the White House has said there will be no second stimulus.

I think many people out there seriously underestimate just how severe this recession is, and that there is no magic fix for it.

I preclude my opinion on this by saying, I hate stimulus measures and all the things that make stimulus a required part of our economy.

The best way to stimulate the economy right now, is to cut checks to the bottom 50% of income earners.
Some where in the range of $5k-$10k.

That will be a direct stimulus without it going towards moronic government ideas of "better."
 
Now I would like to ask the folks out there in the audience this question:

If a second stimulus is needed to avoid a secondary and possibly more severe recession, would you be in favour of it?
Certainly not. Given the first stimulus failed, such a scenario where a 2nd stiumulus is needed is absurd. There's no scenario where I'd be in favor of a 2nd scenario.

Although the question is irrelevent as the White House has said there will be no second stimulus.
Someone there finally has learned the difference between **** and shineola.

think many people out there seriously underestimate just how severe this recession is, and that there is no magic fix for it.
Magic like "stimulus"? I'd agree. What would be nice is for the White House to stop avoiding jobs and actually address it in something other than more jibba-jabba. But then again, this White House has shown little to no competence on most subjects so perhaps the fix is for Congress and the White House to go play golf for the next few years.
 
Of course it is an understanding of economic reality.

Tell me, when has the conservative thinking of economic lazzie-faire ever worked? By worked I mean, created economic growth, jobs and a surplus... in the last 30 years.. NEVER. Hence the economic thinking is flawed on so many levels.

A budget surplus is not a prerequisite for a robust economy. Most economists will tell you that running low budget deficits as a percentage of the GDP, is not a problem. The early 80's through 2007 was one of the most, if not the most prosperous periods in US history. The only real hiccup was between the attacks of 9/11/2001 and the summer of 2003. Over that 20+ year period, unemployment was low, economic growth was strong, and the stock market was booming. During those years, we only ran a budget surplus 4 times.

The economic policies of both Reagan and Bush Jr brought us out of recessions, created jobs and returned America to economic growth. Reagan laid the groundwork for 2 decades of American prosperity, and Bush's policies resulted in the most consecutive months of positive job creation in American history. If Bush would have been more of a fiscal conservative instead of spending like a democrat, He would have likely had a surplus in 2007.
 
Jobs recovery is stronger than past recessions - Sep. 2, 2010

Also from the article:



Now I would like to ask the folks out there in the audience this question:

If a second stimulus is needed to avoid a secondary and possibly more severe recession, would you be in favour of it?

Although the question is irrelevent as the White House has said there will be no second stimulus.

I think many people out there seriously underestimate just how severe this recession is, and that there is no magic fix for it.

Recovery? You have to be kidding. The only reason that job losses are fewer is because we have already lost so many jobs that there are fewer jobs to lose, so there are fewer job losses. A recovery is when we begin getting jobs back, not losing fewer of them.
 
Ironic, since it was the lack of government that got you into the ****hole you are in now.. ahh the irony of American conservative economic thinking!

American conservative thinking = lets **** up the economy with lazzie-faire policies so our friends can get rich, and then to fix the problem... do more of the same!

I really detest agreeing with a European. We have to re-invent again and strike a better balance between structured capitalism and socialism. But not too much socialism. Such things make high unemployment numbers the norm.
 
Last edited:
A budget surplus is not a prerequisite for a robust economy. Most economists will tell you that running low budget deficits as a percentage of the GDP, is not a problem. The early 80's through 2007 was one of the most, if not the most prosperous periods in US history. The only real hiccup was between the attacks of 9/11/2001 and the summer of 2003. Over that 20+ year period, unemployment was low, economic growth was strong, and the stock market was booming. During those years, we only ran a budget surplus 4 times.

The economic policies of both Reagan and Bush Jr brought us out of recessions, created jobs and returned America to economic growth. Reagan laid the groundwork for 2 decades of American prosperity, and Bush's policies resulted in the most consecutive months of positive job creation in American history. If Bush would have been more of a fiscal conservative instead of spending like a democrat, He would have likely had a surplus in 2007.

You have yet to site the "hands off" approach. Instead, you merely describe military Keynesianism (which gives strength to your opposition).
 
If a second stimulus is needed to avoid a secondary and possibly more severe recession, would you be in favour of it?

No,of course not.

Since the last Porkulus Stimulus package didn't do anything but by votes for the politicians who are causing the problem in the first place, since my little girls will have to pay for that nonsense until they're ancient, no.

The answer to the issue of job creation is cutting taxes across the board, especially cutting the taxes on the people who pay the taxes (duh!), and cutting government spending.

Like you said, there's no magic fix.

Tax cuts aren't magic. They're common sense.
 
I really detest agreeing with a European. We have to re-invent again and strike a better balance between structured capitalism and socialism. But not too much socialism. Such things make high unemployment numbers the norm.

That's absolutely right.

The best balance between capitalism and socialism is 100% capitalism, 0% socialism.

We should try it some time. Every time we get closer to real capitalism, the economy does better.
 
Ironic, since it was the lack of government that got you into the ****hole you are in now.. ahh the irony of American conservative economic thinking!

Ironic? the only thing i find ironic is that there are people who actually claim that. :lol: yeah, George Bush; a regular Von Mises, there. :roll:
 
That's absolutely right.

The best balance between capitalism and socialism is 100% capitalism, 0% socialism.

We should try it some time. Every time we get closer to real capitalism, the economy does better.

Well, we already practice socialism to a degree. Social Security and welfare have existed for some time. Roosevelt's 2nd Bill of Rights would have gone a long way to keeping a more equal balance in America. But a 100% capitalism is heartless for a nation that has a long history of being otherwise. It's bad enough that our corporations (Wal-Mart, Nike, etc) screw over many workers abroad, but they absolutely screw over Americans in our own backyards. We need to be Americans first and corporations second. Since around the 80s, we have reversed that. Washington caters to corporations long before it caters to Americans, which is why some of these billion dollar industries actually get money back on tax day while us little folk stress over whether or not we are going to have to pay for any kind of fortune that may have befallen upon us over the year.

We also have to consider the environment. We are in a "Progress Trap." This is a term best explained using Easter Island. This island used to saturated with forest. Over the centuries, the indigenous people hacked down trees to use as rollers to move their rock carved heads around the island. At one point, the trees were becoming scarce and this is where rock heads started to be left on the coasts. Eventually, one guy visited the last tree on that island and hacked it down. What this means is that people had a sense of progress in their heads with these carved heads and no matter how obvious the end was, they continued as if committing suicide.

Another example of the "Progress Trap" is in Canada. I forget what the site is called, but it was a location where hunters thousands of years ago used to run hundreds of bison over a cliff. They had evolved their hunting abilities to the point where they figured out that they didn't even have to try. They could just herd hundreds of them off a cliff and pick a few out for dinner. Eventually, they killed out all the game like this. They knew that the herds were becoming harder and harder to find, yet they practiced this until starvation took them or they migrated to find food elsewhere.

Capitalism is a progress trap in today's civilization. We see the rain forests, the oceans, and ecosystems being destroyed exponentially year after year, yet we continue to "progress" and push as if we can't see an end. 100% capitalism is not good for the economy as a whole, people as a whole, and the environment as a whole. Right now we consume 130% of what the earth can produce a year. This is mostly all through capitalism and it is the very few in corporate offices who are getting rich. In the mean time the bison are runnning out and the Easter Island heads can't be moved as they once could.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom